Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1887-04-23

lo1 81 gasMi1ns ~ faei - - lsara1nE
nd Iszai as1@ss ~ iavysr-
he mere vs eorssdsE - mates.
ths msss sppassat IL usn b.
soms taa4 ths viseo@ q sRss has Hos
bsea e fsalt 10 ps0uOunsi1R trial y
isry 70 be the most peerless systs@ ysf
dss1ssd fog TIE aegass@a1s o. p1osie
and pTisaas wEoa9& Bus while - -
Iisys N tie sysss1 e. . syssem, -
think fsa4 IN detail 4 i szsosptibis d
impr7yszezf. Ous Of TIE GEsatest %
isstisns - fhe sgsse@ - i Dow siaeos
= tie rsqslssmenl fh2i shsoiats INA
sinisy b nsesassFy n order ts1s Ess-
diss nay b Esn4srsd- We are al ~
niIiar With re solitary jurymsn vhs
soIa fsisnS after 6isazrsement tnas
@thsse wooid have been no tgoub1e n
reading 9 ysrdiot IL the OshsE sasssn
Jurors had sOs besn 30 obssinase- IL
u Always extremely di2caIt 70 Gcd
twelve zes vho saa aREss upon even
TIE nost trivial qzsstisn. and tns vo1-
der tbsEsfsrs IL no4 that 80 many iarSes
disaerss. bat that - many agFes- Ons
man Wbo, thEoagh prsiodiee. stopsdity
OF . more Sinister motive. refuses 70
yisid even yhs1 BE has no grsand 70
stand 1Dos, can fFustE4ss justice and
81 81 naueht The tine ard no0ey that
. prosEastsd Trial may have oost- This
b obviously wrong. Wbsrs Q decided
majority Of 9 Iury are agreed, thsEs i.
- 9 rule, 20 reassn 10 doab4 thsir de-
eisiOu. Il nighs sfssn hsppsn thai .
bare majority Of Q jury might b
wrong. bat 10 would seldom, II
ever. happen thas Ten o. eleven
nsa out Of twelve s0ald be wrong
upsa . question upon vhish they were
ell agreed. This suggests the inquiry
as 70 Washer 10 v0osd not be wise to
modify the laW 20 that ten 0at Of twelve
would be sufaeisnt for 8 veFdiet. In
civil eases we have ne doubt bat that a
Of this kisd wOald be wise
and would have Q tendency TO prevent
and 90. In many cases,
save expensive and tedious litiRsties.
Ia criminal casss there 10 more room for
doubt The trial Of q man for his life
y . serioas thine. and too many pre-
can hardly Be taken 10 guard
against 40 upiuss oonvietion. Bat even
Ia capital Gases. when vs consider bow
justice may be detected BY the unrsa.
sonable and unTeasoning refusal Of one
or tive men 10 aooept the plain proof
that may be pat before them, II might
not be upon the whole an undesirable
change. We know Of no duty that Q
citizen is called upon 10 perform shat
% great . responsibility -
serving upon . jury. As the JadRe
when be takes bis seat upon the
bench should leave behind him ell
prsiudioe and bias, 20 q juror when
be takes bis seat in . juEy-box shoald
diysat himself entirely Of personal pref
udiee, and do the duty that his cath
and his position require of him. II
men could always be eouated upon to
do this IL would not be too mneh 10 ASA
that unanimous verdict should be ne
eessaEy for 9 conviction in capital cases.
Unfortunately, however. there are 10
all communities men Who 90 far forget
the obligation Of their oath and their
daily - citizens ts cast their vote for
conviction OF sequittal not in accord
auoe with the facts 81 shown by the
evidence but in accordance with their
sympathy or their prejudice. II is the
presence Of such men Hpon iuries that
makes Il at least an open question
whether IL would not be we'll 10 alter the
form Of jury trial even In capital cases.
The good 81 sosioty Demands that trials
should be 90 conducted a. 10 inspire In
the community . respect for the law
and It's workings. and 9 belief that no
guilty man can esOaps and ne innocent
man suffer. To attain this IL Is abso-
lutely necessary that the Jury as well a.
abe judge do its whole duty. What that
duty is We all know. aud the man who
proves Feereant TO Il takes upon him
self q grave responsibility.